ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S ZETA INVESTMENT PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1389/DEL/2011Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 July 2018AY 2003-042 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's appeal for non-prosecution. For AY 2003-04, the revenue's appeal was allowed, with the protective addition to continue until the substantive addition for AY 2002-03 is finally confirmed.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2002-03 was dismissed for non-prosecution. The revenue's appeal for AY 2003-04 concerned a protective addition of Rs. 1.50 crores.

What were the issues?

Whether a protective addition should continue when the substantive addition for a prior year is confirmed, and the assessee's failure to prosecute their appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Not specified

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “D”: NEW DELHI

Before: SMT DIVA SINGH & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHIDr. GC Narang Marg,

For Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, Sr. DR
Hearing: 30/07/2018Pronounced: 31/07/2018

O R D E R PER BENCH 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A)- XXI, New Delhi dated 11.01.2011 for the Assessment Year 2002-03, wherein, the addition on account of „sham transaction‟ was upheld amounting to Rs. 1.50 crores. Despite repeated notice the assessee has not remained present. In view of this we do not have any other alternative but to dismiss the appeal of the assessee for non prosecution. The same appeal was earlier also dismissed on 05.07.2011 for similar reasons. In view of this it is apparent that the assessee is not interested for prosecuting the above appeal. Therefore, for the similar reasons we dismiss the appeal of the assessee for non prosecution. Page | 1

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →